The intention of this analysis is to continue the discussion (from the previous issuees) of some parts of the history of what is declared or titled „Islamic art”, within the critical and theoretical framework of both Occidental-Western and (some) Muslim
perspectives. The analysis and establishments of limits in line with the prevailing authorities will contribute to the vital modalities of qadar/ṣināʿat discourse which are resolutely Islamic and in line with their source (ar. al-marjaʿ or al-maṣdar). Particular attention is drawn to advocating differences, due to Occidental-westernized academic efforts to ignore the spirit of unity and the self-reflective Islamic constants of qadar/ṣināʿat discourses and impose the artificial dichotomy of the sacral and
profane, and due to paradigmatic views on the evaluation of the creative (aestheticized) achievement of the originator/designer of representation, (i.e. homo islamicus) as absolute western ownership.
On the other hand, the aestheticized activity of homo islamicus within the conscious recognitive and cognitive productive-reflective orientation has a very specific historical existence. If the well-known saying of Jacques Derrida – the well
known Postmodernist, ‘il n’y a pas de hors-texte’ („there is nothing outside the text”) can be applied to the title „Islamic art”, we can raise the question as to whether the aestheticized activity of homo islamicus exists or not. It seems that the proper
question related to the modalities of qadar/ṣināʿat discourse should be ‘qu'est-ce qu'ily a de hors-texte’ („what is there outside the text?”).